Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Good for Clinton for speaking about climate change in the post-Sandy moment. What better time to point out the effects that rising ocean levels will have on coastal areas as these storms get more intense due to warming effects. What better time to challenge Americans to think about it and make that connection.

Two notes on what Clinton said. Romney actually mocked Obama during his convention acceptance speech. And Bill is referring to himself as a New Yorker, clearly. "In my part of the country..." jars you a little as he's such a southerner in style.

Who knows, maybe the Clinton words here bode well in terms of some budding leadership on climate change. After Americans have been walloped like this, you'd like to think so.

Tuesday, October 30, 2012

A real head shaker of a column today from David Brooks as the U.S. campaign enters its last week: "The Upside of Opportunism." Basically, Brooks writes that Romney is more likely to get stuff done if he's elected President because Republicans in the House will go along with him. And Democrats in the Senate will work with him as well, because they'll be willing to bargain.

Meanwhile, Brooks says, if Obama is re-elected, there'll be the same old cast of characters and gridlock. Therefore, Romney gets the benefit of Brooks' thesis that there is an upside to opportunism. Romney should be rewarded with a win because the Republicans are just too intransigent to work with a Democratic president.

Brooks doesn't couch it as being wrong. He doesn't write that this may be what some voters are thinking - and they well might be - he's not pointing it out as an observation. The sum of his column is to suggest going with Romney because of the gridlocked mess the Republicans created. Who knows, maybe Brooks has looked north to us for inspiration where Harper was re-elected after having had a contempt motion moved successfully against his government. It has that same sort of stench to it.

There is no consideration from Brooks, at all, of what Republicans should properly do if Obama gets a second mandate. That is, recognize the choice of American voters and work with him. Doesn't rate a mention.

In total agreement with Kevin Drum on this who frames it as rewarding the hostage takers. What an absolute load of immoral hooey.

Monday, October 29, 2012

Not going to talk about climate change during the U.S. presidential election? Mother Nature may be taking her revenge, in the form of the storm bearing down on the U.S. east coast and which will affect many here in eastern Canada. Joe Romm has some of the science explaining how the warming climate is manifesting itself in this storm:

“A meteorologically mind-boggling combination of ingredients [] coming together: one of the largest expanses of tropical storm (gale) force winds on record with a tropical or subtropical cyclone in the Atlantic or for that matter anywhere else in the world; a track of the center making a sharp left turn in direction of movement toward New Jersey in a way that is unprecedented in the historical database, as it gets blocked from moving out to sea by a pattern that includes an exceptionally strong ridge of high pressure aloft near Greenland; a “warm-core” tropical cyclone embedded within a larger, nor’easter-like circulation; and eventually tropical moisture and arctic air combining to produce heavy snow in interior high elevations. This is an extraordinary situation, and I am not prone to hyperbole.” [Stu Ostro]

Being fueled in part by “ocean temperatures along the Northeast U.S. coast [] about 5°F above average,” so “there will be an unusually large amount of water vapor available to make heavy rain” [former Hurricane Hunter Jeff Masters]

Also being driven by a high pressure blocking pattern near Greenland “forecast to be three standard deviations from the average” [Climate Central and CWG]

The jet stream pattern — particularly the strongly negative NAO [North Atlantic Oscillation] and associated blocking — that has been in place for the last 2 weeks and is projected to be with us into next week is exactly the sort of highly amplified (i.e., wavy) pattern that I’d expect to see more of in response to ice loss and enhanced Arctic warming. Blocking happens naturally, of course, but it’s very possible that this block may have been boosted in intensity and/or duration by the record-breaking ice loss this summer. Late-season hurricanes are not unheard of either, but Sandy just happened to come along during this anomalous jet-stream pattern, as well as during an autumn with record-breaking warm sea-surface temperatures off the US east coast. It could very well be that general warming along with high sea-surface temperatures have lengthened the tropical storm season, making it more likely that a Sandy could form, travel so far north, and have an opportunity to interact with a deep jet-stream trough associated with the strong block, which is steering it westward into the mid-Atlantic. While it’s impossible to say how this scenario might have unfolded if sea-ice had been as extensive as it was in the 1980s, the situation at hand is completely consistent with what I’d expect to see happen more often as a result of unabated warming and especially the amplification of that warming in the Arctic.

I haven’t read the entire Noren paper yet, but it does not surprise me that severe flooding in the northeast could be linked with periods of negative AO [Arctic Oscillation]. When the AO is negative, the jet stream tends to be wavier, just like the situation we’re in now, which favors slow-moving weather systems that can cause floods. Losing ice, reducing the poleward temperature gradient, and warming the entire climate system should contribute to increasing the likelihood of condusive to anomalous storms.

There's much more at his post to take in on this "warming-driven monster" that is asserting itself with a vengeance in the last week of the U.S. campaign. Maybe more attention to the global elephant in the room would have been warranted.

P.S. It goes without saying that our government, of course, is not doing any better in addressing the challenge.

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

Just wanted to share this excellent nomination of 15 year old Malala Yousafzai, the Pakistani girl who was shot by the Taliban. More on the nomination:

Rae's support helps the campaign, as Nobel Peace Prize regulations place requirements on who can submit a nomination. Rae, as a member of Canada's Parliament, is eligible to make a nomination, as are members of international courts, some academics, people who have previously been awarded the peace prize and others.

"One of the things I've discovered in talking to people in different parts of the country is there's a tremendous bedrock of goodwill and enthusiasm. It's not being manifested on the surface at this point in time but it is there nonetheless," he said.

"I would also argue ... that we are, by inclination and in terms of our history, we are small 'l' liberals, we Canadians. And it's just a matter now of doing the necessary work to recommit ourselves to Canadians, to show people that we are hungry, that we have good ideas, that we understand the future, we know where our place for success can be found in that future and to get on with the work.

"So I am, in fact, very optimistic about the future of my federal party."

That is the classic optimism and positivity of McGuinty that he would have brought to the federal level. I hope the next federal leader will have their own personal version of it as well.

But for one seat, over one year ago in the 2011 fall election, would McGuinty have been in federally? We will never know.

Monday, October 22, 2012

He wanted it. Yes. Very persuasive closer there. I felt emotion from Obama tonight, as I did in the second debate as well.

This one seemed a little more enjoyable than the other two. There was no awkward mano-a-mano ambling around the stage and confrontation as characterized by the second debate. No sleepy Obama from the first encounter.

Obama seemed focused like a laser. He took advantage of the openings he was given on China, the military and commander-in-chief moral authority. He had that hard stare thing going on that totally worked.

I don't think you could have asked for a better night from Obama as he closed the debates out. Whether it will be enough to hang on and overcome Romney's economy rhetoric...I sure as heck hope so.

Why would Flaherty go here? The burden should be on Flaherty et al. to demonstrate that moving from
what is working to an alternative would be beneficial for Canada. Any move to take us down a road that the U.S. has gone by destabilizing a longstanding public and successful institution like this should be treated with great caution.

Here is his nomination statement, "Our Campaign," to give a sense of Paul's approach to politics:

The Liberal point of view is that ‘we’re all in this together’ is much better than ‘you’re on your own’ and that liberalism is not an ideology, it is not a book of campaign promises, liberalism is a movement based on the trust in others to do the right thing, building efficient government to ensure a prosperous, fair, and clean country.

Liberal politics are the politics of inclusion and responsibility, of facts and evidence, of reason and dialogue over dogma and ideology.

Follow his blog for regular updates from the man himself, you will not be disappointed!

On a Sunday morning, prime time for political news after all, the PM has called the by-elections that need to be called to fill the vacancies in the House of Commons due to various resignations: "Harper calls 3 byelections for Nov. 26." I don't know why he didn't get this out of the way Friday at midnight like the other significant business his government conducted at the witching hour. But I suppose Sunday morning is the next best thing.

The elephant in the room remains the Etobicoke-Centre riding which is in limbo until this Thursday, October 25th at 9:45 a.m. when the Supreme Court of Canada will finally issue its decision in that litigation. The court will either uphold the lower court ruling that would require a by-election or it will overturn it.

Mr. Harper has decided, however, not to wait a few days to see what the Supreme Court will say. Waiting would have made sense, as he is fully aware that the decision is coming. He could then have called all the by-elections required on the heels of whatever the court decides. It would actually be a reasonable thing to do, to wait. It would be a polite signal to the court given that the court just announced at the end of this past week that the Etobicoke-Centre decision is coming.

So why not wait for the Supreme Court? It's probably a little reflection of the ongoing antipathy between the right wing and their agitation against unelected judges having any kind of say on democratic matters. You're going to decide Etobicoke-Centre, well then, I'm going to set my by-election timings irrespective of what you decide. So there's that.

Also, it could very well be that while they won't admit it, the Conservatives want to work for time in Etobicoke-Centre. It's likely the most difficult race they'll face among all of these by-elections. Their party won't be a strong factor in Victoria. The Conservatives will likely hang on, however, in Durham and Calgary-Centre. So get a few wins under their belt and bolster their chances to hold Etobicoke-Centre - if the by-election occurs - is what they may be thinking.

For if they were to lose Etobicoke-Centre, it would be highly symbolic. It would be a permanent marker against the Harper government's democratic bona fides and a major part of the narrative of this government's anti-democratic tendencies would be cemented. Borys Wrzesnewskyj walking the halls of Parliament would be a daily reminder of that.

Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Yes, I've been posting Mr. Mercer's rants of late. The last three have been bang on and deserve to be widely shared. It's unfortunate that we don't see more of such content on Canadian television given that the majority of Canadians don't support this government yet the venues to see such opposition on our television screens are so limited. Panels on the various political shows just don't cut it.

These latest ads are such a stretch. The notion that there is indeed an "Economic Action Plan" that is being carried out in the present day as an extension of the early 2009 stimulus spending, this neat construct the government has created, is a bunch of hooey. A government can have economic priorities and policies but this idea that there is a document or an official plan of some kind should be losing its credibility. Mercer is right to mock it. The government could call it an EAP at the height of the recession and get away with it. That moment required attention, something different, public assurance. Now it does feel like it's a creation that's living on borrowed time. The real propagandistic feel to these new ads is what makes you take that second hard listen.

Meanwhile, as these ads have ramped up, the expanded meat recall is unfolding. Nice ads on the screens, tainted beef in our homes...too bad this government isn't capable of acting competently when a concrete economic issue in need of a plan presents itself.

Tuesday, October 16, 2012

This exchange had a level of emotional intensity that rose above much of the rest of the debate, despite how competitive and combative it was in other spots. The emotional intensity was all Obama's. He beat back the partisanship that the Republicans have been playing up in recent days on the Libya tragedy by taking full responsibility for the security situation, despite Hillary Clinton's effort last night to deflect responsibility to her. Romney seemed petty, like he'd milk anything for partisan advantage.

Monday, October 15, 2012

Our government hasn’t been perfect. But when it comes to the big things that families count on us to get right –schools, health care, the environment and the economy -- we've gotten it right every time. Just this afternoon, we updated Ontarians on the state of our finances. We're once again ahead of schedule with our plan to balance the budget... We've beaten our budget forecasts in seven of the last nine years.

I feel very good about where we are as a party and a province. But as Liberals, we're always driving forward. The opposition’s political games are holding Ontario back. They've told us they oppose our plan for a two-year pay freeze for government workers. That means we can't make it law. So, we need to go back to the drawing board.

We're going to make a sincere and determined effort to negotiate a wage freeze agreement with our labour partners. Like the agreements already reached with 80,000 public sector workers. We're also going to consult with the opposition about what they would support to freeze wages.

To this end, I’ve asked the Lieutenant Governor to prorogue the legislature to allow those discussions with our labour partners and the opposition to occur in an atmosphere that is free of the heightened rancour of politics in the legislature. And when the legislature returns, we will either have negotiated agreements in hand or a firm sense of what the opposition will support.

As the party and government of relentless progress, we’re always looking for new ideas and ways to renew ourselves. And I’ve concluded that this is the right time for Ontario's next Liberal Premier and our next set of ideas to guide our province forward.

Earlier today, I asked Yasir Naqvi, our party president, to convene a leadership convention at the earliest possible time. I will remain as Premier until that leadership convention. And it will be my honour to continue to serve as the MPP for Ottawa South until the next general election.

I know I've asked some hard things of you. But I’ve always been inspired by the ideal that the older generations work hard to build a bright future for the younger ones. And they do this, always, with love and an unwavering commitment. I saw that in my own mother and father. It’s what Terri and I have tried to do for our children. And I see it in the eyes and actions of Ontario families, every day. I thank you for the honour of serving as your Leader and your Premier... In Ontario, the greatest province in the best country in the world.

Note that he stated he will remain as Premier until the leadership convention to choose his successor. There is, however, some early speculation on his future going on, naturally, given the federal leadership race which technically commences almost a month to the day. He'd certainly have a lot of backers should he choose to give it a run. And it looks like there might be something to this or at least a preserving of options going on: "Federal Liberal leadership campaign building around Ontario premier: sources." Very interesting must read material this evening.

I looked at the dates over which this poll was conducted, first: "The telephone survey of 1,000 Canadians was conducted between Oct.4-11 and is considered accurate within plus or minus 3.1 percentage points, 19 times out of 20." OK, right in the wheelhouse of the aftermath of Trudeau's announcement, which was on October 1st. Followed by an avalanche of coverage. It means that Canadians at that time were heavily exposed to the prospects of the Liberal leadership race, Trudeau, yes, and likely had a thought or two swirling around about the state of political leadership in the country.

This poll also occurred at the height of this latest tainted meat episode and I wouldn't discount that factor either as an influence on people's political choices at the moment. Anything but Conservative could be a factor.

While I am very hesitant with any poll these days, my impression is that this is just one of many you will see showing the three main parties all in the same ballpark. Even when other pollsters have Liberals in third spot, the distance among the parties is never so great that it couldn't be overcome in an election campaign given the fluidity these days. So it means something, but whether anyone should write these numbers down as delivered by Nanos today as some kind of gospel, probably not.

Thursday, October 04, 2012

Agreed: "Mulcair demands Ritz resign over E. coli case." Some of us have been calling for the firing of the Ritz since circa 2008, so we're up to part 13 here on the blog. The listeriosis crisis, also occurring under Ritz's watch and the Conservatives' revision of meat inspection rules, should have brought, at the least, the Prime Minister's patented reshuffling out of this portfolio (which he seems to do in lieu of firing). This gap doesn't look good for the government at all, it's unacceptable in food safety:

Interim Liberal Leader Bob Rae accused the government of moving too slowly to curb the crisis. Rae said authorities in the U.S. stopped imports from the XL Food plants on Sept. 13 while Canada did not shut down the plant until Sept. 27.

"Americans were protected on Sept. 13 because no product was allowed to be exported to the United States," Rae said.

"All Canadian consumers were not protected until Sept. 27, two weeks later. Why were Americans better protected than Canadians?"

"I met this very spirited fellow who claimed to be Mitt Romney," Obama said. "It couldn't have been Mitt Romney because the real Mitt Romney has been running around the country for the last year, promising $5 trillion in tax cuts for the wealthy."

"The fellow on stage last night said he didn't know anything about that. The real Mitt Romney said we don't need any more teachers in our schools. The fellow on stage last night -- he loves teachers, can't get enough of them."

"If you want to be president, you owe the American people the truth," a fired-up Obama told supporters anxious not to see him fritter away his opinion poll lead with less than five weeks to go before election day.

I had two experiences watching that debate last night. The first, with the sound on, left me thoroughly depressed and thinking that Obama had blown it. My tweets reflected that reaction.

The second, later on, with the sound off, left me more optimistic. I guess I missed the parts that James Fallows watched with the sound off:

If you had the sound turned off, Romney looked calm and affable through more of the debate than Obama did, and the incumbent president more often looked peeved. Romney's default expression, whether genuine or forced, was a kind of smile; Obama's, a kind of scowl. I can understand why Obama would feel exasperated by these claims and arguments. Every president is exasperated by what he considers facile claims about what he knows to be impossibly knotty problems. But he let it show.

My take was that Romney was worse with the sound off. If you think about how things have been going for him lately, the 47% video clip has been truly damning. The idea that he'd say one thing behind closed doors and yet say another in public is underpinning his campaign, it's about trust. His default smile expression didn't help dissuade that perception. He appeared to answer quickly, almost unthinkingly. Like he was trying too hard, too caffeinated. When you combine that impression with some of the consensus that he told a few whoppers last night, then he may not have done so well after all.

Obama did seem peeved at times and the note taking made him look less in charge. But he also didn't have the canned look that Romney had. Obama is the one who is criticized as being too smooth. Not last night. He looked like he was thinking on his feet, he was more deliberative, he had a more earnest quality than Romney.

Factor in the economic substance of the debate and the real world context of Americans concerned about the economy, jobs...and I'm not so sure Obama was poorly served by coming off as the one who was working harder as opposed to the guy who seemed more slick. I certainly don't think it was as bad as Andrew Sullivan was portraying it to be.

But for all of the anticipation, and with less than five weeks remaining until Election Day, the 90-minute debate unfolded much like a seminar by a business consultant and a college professor. Both men argued that their policies would improve the lives of the middle class, but their discussion often dipped deep into the weeds, and they talked over each other without connecting their ideas to voters.

Anyway, there's lots of opinion to be had.

P.S. Best thing to come out of the debate, the Big Bird memes that were spawned by Romney saying he loved Big Bird but would kill PBS. Maybe Big Bird will get the last laugh.

There's a certain dynamic going on in Canadian politics that you may not have noticed. Or, maybe you did because you're a sharp cookie. A broader angle that gets lost in the daily hurly-burly. You may have noticed two words in particular that jumped out in yesterday's preview reporting on today's Justin Trudeau leadership launch. In the Toronto Star, for example, note a certain two words in the first sentence:

Justin Trudeau is launching his bid to be Liberal leader with a call for the party to reclaim its role as the voice of Canada’s middle class.

There is much political sizzle surrounding Mr. Trudeau’s bid, but his team is insisting that there will be lots of content, including a heavy emphasis on reclaiming middle-class support, in his initial campaign speech.

There is a quiet debate under way within the Conservative caucus. While not everyone – perhaps not even a majority – agrees, senior figures within the caucus are convinced the party’s future hinges on the outcome of that debate, and they believe Stephen Harper shares their concern. Some Conservatives are asking themselves whether the party is in danger of losing the middle class.